Silicone coated film with back side slip control coating and method of controlling slip of such film

ABSTRACT

The present invention relates to a self-supporting polymer film with a silicone-containing coating layer on the front surface that is capable of releasing free silicone oil and a slip control coating on the back surface, where the slip control coating has an exposed surface adapted to contact the free silicone oil. The slip control coating includes a binder, preferably a polyvinyl pyrrolidone; and optionally includes a coupler, preferably a silane. A method for controlling the slip of silicone coated film by coating the back side of the film with this slip control coating is also disclosed.

This is an continuation-in-part application of U.S. Ser. No. 09/217,719,filed Dec. 21, 1998, U.S. Pat. No. 6,120,868.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention relates generally to a silicone-coated polymericfilm having a back side coating effective to reduce the undesirable slipgenerated by the by-product or contaminant silicone oil released fromthe silicone coating. It further relates to a method for controllingundesirable slip in silicone-coated polymeric film by coating the backside of the film with a slip control coating.

2. Description of Related Art

Silicone-coated polymer films are well known and commercially available.Such silicone-coated polymer films are commonly employed as releasefilms for labels, pressure sensitive tapes, decorative laminates,transfer tapes and the like. The silicone coating on the base polymerfilm allows the adhesive face of the label, for example, to be easilyremoved from the support film by the end user, while providingsufficient stability to the label to prevent it from being accidentallydislodged from the support film before use. Among other things, siliconerelease coatings can also be used as container liners designed forcontact with food. Pizza box liners coated with silicone releasecoatings, for example, allow melted cheese to release easily. Food wasteis minimized, the food is served more easily, and the appearance of theproduct is maintained.

A variety of different silicone release coatings are known in the art.These silicone release coatings include crosslinked formulations,ultraviolet curable or heat curable formulations, solvent-based andsolvent-free formulations, and combinations of the foregoing, such assolvent-free, ultraviolet curable formulations. As disclosed in U.S.Pat. No. 5,350,601 to Culbertson et al., incorporated herein byreference in its entirety, primer formulations have been discovered thatallow these silicone release coatings to bond effectively with the basepolymer films, and to remain bonded over time to the base polymer film.These primer formulations are typically applied to the base polymerfilm, and the silicone release coating is applied on top of theresulting primer layer. The resulting coated polymer film providessuperior performance. For example, coating rub-off, which can causelabels to release too easily, is minimized. Moreover, coatingdelamination, which can cause labels to adhere directly to theunderlying base polymer film, is also minimized or eliminated.

However, during manufacture and during storage of the coated film priorto use, free silicone oil is inevitably released from the coating layeronto the surface of the coated film. This migration creates a high sliplayer or discrete patches of free silicone oil on the film surface. Freesilicone oil can also be transferred easily to the non-silicone-coatedback side of the film. When, for example, the coated film is stored infront-to-back-face contact, as in a typical roll of film, some of thefree silicone oil (typically low molecular weight silicones) on thefront, silicone coated surface of the film will be transferred to theback (typically uncoated) surface of the roll. In the film roll, whichis typically formed during manufacture for storage or transport, thefront, silicone coated surface is placed in contact with the backsurface of the same web as it is wound.

In practice, this free silicone oil contamination can be a drawback. Forexample, when the coated film traverses over idler rolls duringsubsequent processing steps (e.g., during label application), the idlerrolls can slip and lose contact with the film. This can result in uneventension on the film web or loss of alignment. Related problems arisewhen printing the resulting silicone-coated film or labels applied tothat film. The ability of printing inks and solvents to adhere isimpaired by the presence of free silicone oil on the surface to beprinted. Moreover, loss of alignment due to the film's high slip canlead to a high reject rate during printing, particularly where multipleprinting passes are used and proper alignment is crucial to forming a nintegrated final image.

The prior art has recognized the existence of the free silicone oil onthe surfaces of the coated film, and the resulting transfercontamination problem. However, no suggestion has been made in the knownart of any approach to controlling the free silicone oil generated bythe coated film. Instead, in an implicit acknowledgment that no solutionto the transfer contamination problem was available or evident, priorart patents (e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,110,671 to Balloni et al. and U.S.Pat. No. 4,961,992 to Balloni et al.) have attempted to use the freesilicone oil and the resulting increased slip to improve processing.

Nonetheless, it remains commercially desirable to control the effects offree silicone oil. Film processing parameters are highly sensitive tochanges in film friction properties. Ideally, silicone-coated filmswould have a coefficient of friction (“COF”) equivalent to that of plainfilm to simplify processing. This would eliminate the costly and timeconsuming equipment and setting modifications that are required toprocess film having substantially different COFs, as well as the higherreject rate inherent in processing under significantly different COFconditions.

U.S. Pat. No. 5,350,601 to Culbertson et al., discussed above, disclosesa silicone-ready primer coating including a glycidoxy silane and acopolyester. This primer coating is designed for use under a siliconecoating, to improve the integrity of the silicone coating on a basepolymer film. While the Culbertson et al. patent makes reference tocoating both sides of the film with the primer coating, it is envisionedonly that a silicone coating will be applied to all primer coatedsurfaces. There is no suggestion that one side would be coated while theother would be left uncoated. More importantly, there is no suggestionin the Culbertson et al. patent of the silicone-binding properties ofthe silane and copolyester coating.

A commercial product sold at least as early as one year prior to thefiling date of the present application by the assignee of the presentinvention under the designation Hostaphan® 3SAC polyester film includeda silicone-ready primer coating on both sides. That silicone-readyprimer coating included an isophthalic acid/sodium 5-sulfoisophthalicacid/malonic acid/ethylene glycol copolyester, aglycidoxypropyltrimethyoxysilane, a colloidal SiO₂ and sodium laurylsulfate. However, neither side of the film, as sold by the assignee, wassilicone coated. The film was sold as a silicone-ready film, andpurchasers of the film are known to have coated it with silicone.However, the inventors are not aware of any purchaser who coated oneside with silicone, but not the other. Alternate films with thesilicone-ready coating on a single side only (e.g., 3SAB polyester film)were available to customers not interested in silicone coating bothsides.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Accordingly, it is an object of the present invention to provide a basepolymer film with a coating capable of attracting and tying up freesilicone oil contaminants.

It is a further object of the present invention to provide a basepolymer film with a slip control coating on the opposite side of thebase polymer film from the silicone coating. This slip control coatingcan minimize slippage caused by free silicone oil released from thesilicone coating.

It is another object of the present invention to provide a back sidecoating that provides a resulting film having a COF equivalent to thatof plain, uncoated polymer film.

It is yet another object of the present invention to provide a method ofcontrolling slippage on silicone-coated film by means of a reverse-sidecoating.

The present invention has accomplished these objectives by providing aself-supporting polymer film with a silicone-containing coating layer onthe front surface that is capable of releasing free silicone oil and aslip control coating on the back surface, where the slip control coatinghas an exposed surface adapted to contact the free silicone oil. Theslip control coating includes a binder, preferably including awater-soluble copolyester including about 50 to about 98 mol percentisophthalic acid, about 2 to about 20 mol percent of at least onesulfomonomer containing a sulfonate group attached to a dicarboxylicnucleus, and about 100 mol percent of at least one copolymerizableglycol having from about 2 to about 11 carbon atoms; and also includes acoupler, preferably including a silane. An alternate preferred binder ispolyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP). A method for controlling the slip ofsilicone coated film by coating the back side of the film with this slipcontrol coating is also disclosed.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Slip Control Coating

The slip control coating of the present invention acts as an absorbentthat is able to tie up substantial amounts of free silicone oil. Thus,when free silicone oil is released from a silicone coating applied tothe base polymer film, the slip control coating is able to absorb orotherwise take up, tie up, deactivate or render less lubricant some orall of that free silicone oil. Consequently, the COF of the resultingfilm is increased, allowing the film to be processed more easily andevenly.

Most preferably, the slip control coating is applied to a surface (forreference purposes, referred to herein as the back surface) of the basepolymer film opposite the surface (the front surface) bearing thesilicone coating. When the film is wound up into a roll for furtherprocessing, transport or storage, the front and back surfaces come intoclose and direct contact. The slip control coating can then accept theloose silicone released from the silicone coating, and prevent orminimize the formation of patches of free silicone oil on either thefront or the back surface of the film. While it is preferred that theslip control coating be applied evenly over the entire back surface ofthe film, it is also envisioned that the absorbent slip control coatingmay be applied in selected areas or patterns, or at varying thicknesses,or a combination thereof.

The slip control coating of the present invention preferably includes abinder to anchor the slip control coating to the base polymer film. Onepreferred binder is a water soluble copolyester. Preferably, the watersoluble copolyester includes a copolyester as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No.4,493,872 to Funderburk et al., the disclosure of which is incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety. This copolyester is disclosed asthe condensation product of the following monomers or their polyesterforming equivalents: isophthalic acid, a sulfomonomer containing analkali metal sulfonate group attached to a dicarboxylic aromatic nucleusand an alkylene glycol with about 2 to about 11 carbon atoms.Optionally, an aliphatic dicarboxylic acid of the formulaHOOC(CH₂)—_(n)COOH, where n is about 1 to about 11, can also be employedas a monomer therein. An optimal copolyester is made up of about 90 molpercent isophthalic acid, about 10 mol percent of the sodium salt of5-sulfoisophthalic acid and about 100 mol percent ethylene glycol.Alternatively, the ethylene glycol can be replaced with a propane diol,such as 1,3-propane diol, or combinations of the two can be used.

It is important to note, however, that the preferred percentage ofsulfomonomer, isophthalic acid and aliphatic dicarboxylic acid employedis somewhat broader in the context of the present invention than in theFunderburk et al. patent. For example, in the context of the presentinvention, isophthalic acid is preferably about 40 to about 98 molpercent, aliphatic dicarboxylic acid is preferably about 0 to about 50mol percent, and the sulfomonomer is preferably about 2 to about 20 molpercent. In addition, the sulfomonomer group of the present invention isnot limited to an alkali metal sulfonate group. Any sulfomonomer inwhich a sulfonate group is attached to a dicarboxylic nucleus ispreferred for use herein. In fact, any water soluble copolyester thatfunctions to bind the coating to the surface of the base polymer film,either alone or synergistically in combination with other components, ispreferred for use in the slip control coating of the present invention.

An alternate preferred binder component for use in the present inventionis polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP). Preferably, a polyvinylpyrrolidone, PVPK-15®, from ISP, is used. It has also been found that PVP (and lesspreferably, the copolyester binder) are preferably used in conjunctionwith a plasticizer, in part to enhance the coating coalescence. Thisplasticizer preferably includes glycerol, ethylene glycol, or acombination of the two. The binder may also include a water solublecopolyester and PVP.

The binder is preferably present at about 0.1 to about 25 weight percentof the slip control coating composition. It is more preferably presentat about 1 to about 10 weight percent, and most preferably at about 2.6weight percent. However, a PVP binder is most preferably present atabout 10 weight percent. When a plasticizer is used in combination withthe PVP, it is preferably present at about 0.01 to about 5 weightpercent, more preferably about 0.1 to about 2 weight percent.

It is also preferred that the slip control coating of the presentinvention include a coupler component to couple with or otherwise absorbor tie up the free silicone oil contaminant. Preferably, the couplerincludes a silane component. More preferably, the slip control coatingincludes a glycidoxy silane, most preferably aglycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane, such as the one commercially availableas Dow Corning Z-6040® glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane.

The coupler component is preferably present at about 0.1 to about 10weight percent of the slip control coating composition, more preferablyat about 0.5 to about 5 weight percent. Most preferably, the couplercomponent is present at about 1.4 weight percent.

The preferred proportion of the coupler to the binder, when the two arecombined in the slip control coating of the present invention, is in therange of about 1:3 to about 3:1 by weight. Although the scope of thepresent invention is intended to cover even broader ranges, it has beenfound that these proportions provide better results. More preferably,the slip control coating will include about 1 part coupler to about 2parts binder by weight.

In addition, a wicking aid is preferably incorporated into the slipcontrol coating of the present invention. The wicking aid is believed toenhance the ability of the slip control coating to absorb or otherwisetake up free silicone oil. The wicking aid is preferably inorganic. Morepreferably, the wicking aid includes colloidal SiO₂, most preferably theproduct commercially available as Nalco 1060® colloidal SiO₂. Otherwicking aids that are preferred for use in the present invention includesilica in one or more of its various morphological forms, includingthose commercially available as Syloid® silica or Rapidup® silica.Moreover, a combination of two or more of the foregoing wicking aids isalso preferred for use. The wicking aid is preferably present at about0.01 to about 3 weight percent of the slip control coating, morepreferably at about 0.1 to about 1 weight percent. Most preferably, thewicking aid is present at about 0.4 weight percent.

Moreover, the slip control coating of the present invention preferablyincludes a surface active agent. It is believed that this surface activeagent enhances the appearance of the slip control coating when it iscoated onto the base polymer film. More preferably, the surfactantincludes an anionic surfactant, most preferably sodium lauryl sulfate.Alternate preferred surfactants that have been shown effective in thecompositions of the present invention include fluorosurfactants,including the surfactant commercially available from 3M as Fluorad®FC-170C; sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate, including the productcommercially available as Rhodacal® LDS-10 surfactant from RhonePoulenc; ethoxylated 2, 4, 7, 9-tetramethyl-5-decyl-4, 7-diol, includingthe product commercially available from Air Products as Surfynol® 465.In addition to other beneficial properties, these surfactants have beenshown to provide enhanced resistance to blocking. It is preferred thatthe surfactant be present in the slip control coating at about 0.0001 toabout 5 weight percent, more preferably at about 0.001 to about 1 weightpercent. Most preferably, the surfactant is present at about 0.04 weightpercent.

It has also been found that the pH of the slip control coating affectsits performance. Preferably, the pH of a copolyester-based and/orsilane-based slip control coating, as applied, is about 7 to about 10,more preferably basic, from about 7.5 to about 9. Consequently, theselection of alkaline components, such as alkaline wicking aid Nalco1060® colloidal SiO₂, will affect the pH of the resulting slip controlcoating, and thus its performance. Conventional pH modifiers maypreferably be used to the extent necessary to achieve the desired pHlevels, alone or in combination with alkaline wicking aids. Otherconventional additives may also be used in the slip control coating ofthe present invention.

The slip control coating of the present invention is typically appliedto the base film as an aqueous dispersion and at a solids concentrationin the range of about 0.5 to about 12 weight percent, more preferably atabout 2 to about 6 weight percent. The preferred solids level of theslip control coating, as it is applied to the base polymer film, is alevel sufficient to yield a final dry coating thickness within the rangeof about 0.03 g/m² to about 0.15 g/m². The preferred thickness of thedried slip control coating is about 2.5×10⁻⁹ m to about 2.5×10⁻⁶ m witha more preferred thickness of about 2.5×10⁻⁸ m.

While the COF of the back surface of the film, measured against itself(back-to-back) is highly dependent on variable manufacturing andprocessing analyses, it can generally be said that a back-to-back COF ofgreater than about 0.30 is preferred for coated films of the presentinvention, with back-to-back COF of greater than about 0.35 being morepreferred, and greater than about 0.40 being most preferred. Expressedin a relative fashion, it is preferred that the coated films of thepresent invention have a back-to-back COF at least about 0.10 greaterthan the same silicone-coated film without a slip control coating of thepresent invention.

Base Film

The slip control coatings and coatings method of the present inventionare applicable to any polymeric film capable of acting as a substratefor a silicone-release coating and a slip control coating. For example,the present invention is applicable to polymeric films such as thosemade from polyamides exemplified by nylon; polyolefins such aspolypropylene and polyethylene; polyester such as polyethyleneterephthalate; polyacetal; polycarbonate; and the like. The invention isparticularly applicable to polyester, most preferably polyethyleneterephthalate, polyethylene naphthalate or polybutylene terephthalate.The present invention is also applicable to polymeric films includingcopolyesters such as polyethylene terephthalate isophthalate. Apreferred process for forming a base film is set forth in U.S. Pat. No.5,350,601 to Culbertson et al., incorporated above by reference.Generally, any polyester film based on a polymer resulting frompolycondensation of a glycol or diol with a dicarboxylic acid (or itsester equivalents) such as terephthalic acid, isophthalic acid, sebacicacid, malonic, adipic, azelaic, glutaric, suberic, succinic acids andthe like, of mixtures of two or more of the foregoing, are preferred foruse in the present invention. Suitable glycols include ethylene glycol,diethylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, and polyols such as butanedioland the like. Mixtures of two or more of the foregoing are alsosuitable.

Any of the above base polymer films can contain conventional additivessuch as antioxidants, delusterants, pigments, fillers such as silica,calcium carbonate, kaolin, titanium dioxide or mixtures thereof,antistatic agents and the like, all of which are well known in the art.

In addition, the base polymer film may be a polymer laminate. Suchlaminates include polymer-polymer laminates like polyester-polyolefin orpolyester-adhesive-polyolefin, polymer-metallic laminates such aspolyester-aluminum, or polymer-paper or polymer-adhesive-paperlaminates.

The films may be produced by any well known technique in the art. Forexample, polyester is typically melted and extruded as an amorphoussheet onto a polished revolving casting drum to form a cast sheet of thepolymer. The sheet is quickly cooled and then stretch oriented in one ormore directions to impart strength and toughness to the film. The sheetis typically stretched from about two to about four times the originalcast sheet dimension, in one or both directions. Biaxial orientation ismost preferred, with monoaxial orientation being less preferred.Generally, stretching occurs in a temperature range from about thesecond order transition temperature of the polymer to below thetemperature at which the polymer softens and melts. Where necessary, thefilm is heat treated after stretching to “lock-in” the properties byfurther crystallizing the film. The crystallization imparts stabilityand good tensile properties to the film. Such heat treatment forpolyester film is generally conducted at about 190° C. to about 240° C.

Silicone Coating

The silicone coatings preferred for use in the present invention aresilicone release coating compositions. A variety of silicone releasecoating compositions are commercially available, with preferredcompositions including those sold by Wacker Silicones Company, GeneralElectric Silicones, PLC (Rhodia), Dow-Corning and others. The siliconecoating can be, but is not limited to, a solvent cross-linkable typesilicone coating, a solvent-free silicone coating, a solvent-freeultraviolet or electron beam curable silicone coating, or an aqueousbased silicone coating. The slip control coating of the presentinvention is useful in conjunction with any silicone coating thatreleases free silicone oil. Thus, any films coated with siliconecoatings that generate free silicone oil contaminants can also benefitfrom use with the back side coatings and coating methods of the presentinvention.

A preferred silicone coating for use in the present invention is athermal cured silicone coating, more preferably a platinum catalyzedcoating. Most preferably, the silicone coating used is the siliconecoating present on the polyester film commercially available fromMitsubishi Polyester Film, LLC as Hostaphan® 2SLK. It is preferred thatthese be contained in a silicone emulsion. It is, of course, importantthat the slip control coating not interfere substantially with thecuring and anchoring ability of the silicone coating on the front side.Accordingly, the compatibility of the slip control coating with thespecific silicone coating must be considered. It is preferred that thesilicone coating be fully cured.

Coating Methods

In-line coating of the base polymer layer, in which the coatings areapplied during the film manufacturing process and before it is heat-set,is the preferred method for use herein. Typically, the base polymer filmis coated after corona treatment and prior to the stretch orientation ofthe film as described in British Patent No. 1,411,564, or coated betweendrawing steps (when biaxially oriented film is produced) as taught byU.S. Pat. No. 4,571,363, or coated post-draw as taught by U.S. Pat. No.3,322,553.

In addition to in-line coating, one or more of the coatings of thepresent invention may be off-line coated (after manufacturing and heatsetting the film), preferably after conventional surface modification ofthe polymeric substrate has occurred. Thus, the coating and method ofthe present invention are also intended for use where, for example, thebase polymer film is produced and later coated off-line with one or morecoatings of the present invention. Alternatively, one or more coatingscan be applied in-line, with the remainder being applied off-line.Conventional off-line coating processes include roll coating, reverseroll coating, gravure roll coating, reverse gravure roll coating, brushcoating, wire-wound rod (Meyer rod) coating, spray coating, air knifecoating, meniscus coating or dipping.

While surface modification of the base polymer film prior to coating isnot required, it has been found that better results are obtained if thesurface or surfaces of the base polymer film are modified beforeapplication of the coatings of the present invention. Conventionalsurface modification techniques include corona treatment, which is themost common and most preferred procedure for modifying the surface ofthe polymer base film to enhance coating adhesion. The corona treatmentor other surface modification should be sufficient to permit wetting outof the coating. Corona treatment of about 1.0 watts per square foot perminute is typically sufficient to achieve the desired results.

In light of the foregoing, a preferred method of controlling slip of asilicone-coated film is provided herein. Preferably, a back face of abase polymer film is coated with a slip control coating of the presentinvention. This coating can occur before, after or at the same time thefront face of the base polymer film is coated with the silicone coating.The slip control coating is applied at a stage before the siliconecoating is applied, or it can be applied after the silicone coating isapplied. The slip control coating is preferably not overcoated withanother coating. Such a top coating could limit the ability of the slipcontrol coating to tie up or otherwise limit the slip of the freesilicone oil contaminants. Moreover, it is possible to coat layers ofindividual components or submixtures of the slip control coating insequence on a base polymer layer to achieve the objectives of thecoating. Such layering would be encompassed within the scope of thepresent invention.

EXAMPLES

The following Examples demonstrate various aspects of certain preferredembodiments of the present invention, and are not to be construed aslimitations thereof.

Example 1

The following base coating sample was formulated:

Slip Control Coating A

Slip control coating made up of 2.6% of a copolyester of 90 mol percentisophthalic acid, 10 mol percent of the sodium salt of5-sulfoisophthalic acid and 100 mol percent ethylene glycol +1.4%glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane (Dow Coming Z-6040®) +0.4% colloidalsilica (Nalco® 1060 colloidal SiO₂) +0.04% sodium lauryl sulfate +water

Certain variations of these samples were also formulated, as set forthin the chart below.

Silicone Coating S is a commercially available silicone coating soldcoated on a base film as Hostaphan® 2SLK polyester film.

Biaxially oriented, heat set PET film was in-line coated between drawsteps with the following samples, and tested for COF, measuring bothback-to-back and front-to-front COF. COF was determined via ASTM methodD-1894-63. The Back Side Coating pH was also determined. Selectedsamples were also tested after 72 hours at 1000 psi (back-to-back COFonly):

Back Initial Initial Side Front Back to Front to COF Side Back Side BackFront after 72 Sample Coating Coating pH COF COF hours C1 None None 0.450.46 C2 S None 0.29 0.13 0.25 C3 None A 7.62 0.49 0.46  1 S A 7.62 0.410.14 0.40  2 S A with pH 9.00 0.42 0.14 0.41 modifier  3 S A with no6.30 0.29 0.14 0.28 colloidal silica  4 S A at 8% solids 8.55 0.40 0.140.39  5 S A at 8% solids 6.00 0.33 0.13 0.31 with no colloidal silica  6S Copolyester of A 8.08 0.27 0.13 0.25 only  7 None Copolyester of A8.08 0.45 0.45 only  8 S 50/50 (copol. to 8.72 0.41 0.13 0.42 silane) A 9 S 50/50 A with no 6.40 0.33 0.13 0.30 colloidal silica 10 S A withdouble 8.72 0.43 0.13 0.40 the colloidal silica 11 S A with pH 9.20 0.430.13 modifier but no colloidal silica

Sample C1 is an uncoated control sample, showing equivalent, highfront-to-front and back-to-back coefficients of friction of 0.46 and0.45, respectively, under the prevailing test conditions. Sample C2 isthe silicone-coated control, having the conventional front side siliconecoating (designated “S”) and no back side coating. It shows a very lowfront-to-front COF of 0.13, attributable to the silicone coating. Itclearly demonstrates the effect of silicone transfer to the back side,with a back-to-back COF of 0.29 (a reduction of 0.16 from the uncoatedcontrol) initially, and an even lower COF of 0.25 after 72 hours. Thesedata demonstrate that the silicone transfer problem can increase overtime. Sample C3 is also a control, having no front side siliconecoating, but including the base slip control Coating A on the back side.The resulting COF data are in line with those of the plain film ofSample C1.

The remaining samples demonstrate the effects of Coating A, ormodifications thereof, on the COF of silicone coated film. Sample 1,with a back side Coating A, has an initial front-to-front COF of 0.14,similar to that of control Sample C2. However, its initial back-to-backCOF is 0.41, very close to that of uncoated control Sample C1, andsubstantially higher (0.12 higher) than that of control Sample C2. Thisdemonstrates the dramatic improvement in slip control preferred CoatingA provides to silicone coated film.

Sample 2 is similar to Sample 1, however the pH of Coating A has beenincreased to 9.00 from 7.62. The COF results are similar.

However, Sample 3, in which the formulation of Coating A is preparedwithout addition of colloidal silica, consequently reducing the pH to6.3 from 7.62, shows an almost complete elimination of the COF effect ofSamples 1 and 2. Sample 3 has COF properties almost identical to that ofsilicone coated control Sample C2, although with slightly less decreasein back-to-back COF over time. It appears, based on Sample 11, that thiseffect is primarily attributable to the decreased pH, and not the lackof colloidal silica. Sample 11 incorporates a higher pH Coating Aformulated without colloidal silica, but with a pH modifier, such asammonium hydroxide. Its properties are similar to high pH Sample 2.Similarly, doubling the amount of colloidal silica (see Sample 10) alsohas little effect on the film's COF.

Increasing the solids of Coating A to 8 percent (roughly double that ofbase Coating A) has little effect on its performance, as shown in Sample4. However, removing the colloidal silica, and consequently decreasingthe coating pH, as shown in Sample 5, produced a dramatic, although notcomplete, decline in performance.

Sample 6 and control Sample 7 demonstrate that the copolyester componentof Coating A, by itself, does not provide any improved benefits. The COFdata of Sample 6 are similar to that of silicone coated control SampleC2. Sample 7 acts as a further control, showing that plain film with thecopolyester element of Coating A, alone, has similar properties tountreated film Sample C1.

Further manipulation of Coating A demonstrates that a composition ofequal proportions of copolyester to silane in Coating A (see Sample 8)produces results equivalent to that of base Sample 1. It should be notedthat back-to-back COF actually improved slightly after 72 hours for thissample. When the colloidal silica of this sample is removed, and the pHis consequently lowered (see Sample 9), we see the expected dramaticdecline in COF performance.

Thus, Coating A is believed to function most effectively at a basic pH,across a broad range of solids weight percent. Its copolyester componentalone provides no appreciable improved function; thus, the copolyestercombines synergistically with the glycidoxysilane to provide theimproved function. However, as shown in Example 11, excellent resultsare achieved without the colloidal silica, provided the pH was raisedsufficiently to compensate for its absence.

Example 2

As a separate trial, biaxially oriented, heat set PET film was in-linecoated between draw steps with the following samples, and tested for COFinitially, back-to-back and front-to-front. Selected samples were testedafter 72 hours at 1000 psi. Certain of these samples were returned toambient pressure and retested after two weeks of storage (back-to-backonly):

Back Back Initial Initial Side Side Front Back to Front to COF COF SideBack Side Back Front after 72 after 2 Sample Coating Coating COF COFhours weeks C1 None None 0.38 0.39 C2 S None 0.26 0.13 0.26 0.24 C3 NoneA 0.33 0.33 C4 None Copolyester of 0.34 0.39 A only  1 S A 0.37 0.130.40 0.36  2 S Copolyester 0.32 0.14 0.33 0.33 and colloidal silica of Aonly  3 S Copolyester, 0.31 0.14 0.32 colloidal silica and E  4 S A and0.75% 0.45 0.15 0.43 0.44 silica (Syloid 244 × 1517)  5 S A + 0.75% 0.400.14 0.39 silica (RapidUp)  6 S with A + 0.75% 0.37 0.13 0.40 ½ thesilica V20 (RapidUp)  7 S F 0.30 0.13 0.28  8 S G 0.27 0.14 0.27  9 S H0.23 0.13 0.25 10 S I 0.28 0.14 0.27 11 S J 0.29 0.15 0.19 0.23 12 Swith None 0.27 0.13 0.25 ½ the V20 E is a fluorosurfactant commerciallyavailable from 3M as Fluorad ® FC-170C surfactant F is the primer usedon commercially availabIe Hostaphan ® 2CSR polyester film G is theprimer used on commercially available Hostaphan ® 4400 polyester film His the primer used on commercially available Hostaphan ® 4700 polyesterfilm I is the primer used on commercially available Hostaphan ® 4LM2polyester film J is the primer used on commercially availableHostaphan ® 2DEF polyester film

Once again, Sample C1 is an uncoated control sample, showing equivalent,high front-to-front and back-to-back coefficients of friction of 0.38and 0.39 (after 72 hours), respectively, under the selected testconditions. The difference between the COF data for this C1 and SampleC1 of Example 1 can be attributed to typical variability in processing,with relative data being most significant. Sample C2 is thesilicone-coated control, having the conventional front side siliconecoating (designated “S”) and no back side coating. It shows a very lowfront-to-front COF of 0.13, attributable to the silicone coating. Itclearly demonstrates the effect of silicone transfer to the back side,with a back-to-back COF of 0.26 (a drop of 0.12 from the uncoatedcontrol) initially, and an even lower COF of 0.24 after 2 weeks. Thesedata demonstrate that, left unchecked, the silicone transfer problem cangrow worse over time. Samples C3 and C4 are also controls, having nofront side silicone coating, but including the base slip control CoatingA (or its copolyester component) on the back side. The resulting COFdata are close to, but somewhat lower than, those of the plain film ofSample C1, which may be attributable to trial-to-trial processingvariation.

Subsequent samples demonstrate the effects of Coating A, ormodifications thereof, on the COF of silicone coated film. Sample 1,with a back side Coating A, has an initial front-to-front COF of 0.13,similar to that of control Sample C2. However, its initial back-to-backCOF is 0.37, very close to that of uncoated control Sample C1, andsubstantially higher (0.11 higher) than that of control Sample C2. Thisagain demonstrates the dramatic improvement slip control preferredCoating A provides to silicone coated film.

Samples 2 and 3 demonstrate that the copolyester and colloidal silica ofCoating A, by themselves, provide much less of a benefit than the fullformulation of Coating A. This is expected, because no primary coupleris available in the coating. When a fluorosurfactant commerciallyavailable from 3M as Fluorad® FC-170C surfactant is added to the twocomponents (Sample 3), no improvement is shown, with COF data actuallydeclining slightly.

Significant increase of the back-to-back COF is found in Samples 4 and5, where silica is added to the Coating A formulation. To the extent oneis seeking to replicate the COF of uncoated film, these additives maynot be necessary. However, when the highest possible COF is desired,both provide substantial increases over base Sample 1.

Sample 6 is a modification of Sample 5, in which the front side siliconecoating is modified to include only half of the crosslinker.Back-to-back COF is lower than that of Sample 5, and identical to thatof base Sample 1. Sample 12 acts as a control.

Samples 7 through 11 are comparative examples using the standardfront-side silicone coating with other potential back side coatings.None represents a substantial improvement over silicone coated controlSample C2.

Example 3

The positive results attributable to a PVP binder are reflected in thisexample series. Back to back coefficient of friction (B/B COF) for thisseries is determined based on the back side against itself after aminimum of 16 hours of 1000 psi in contact with the silicone coatedside.

Slip Control Coating B

Slip control coating made up of 0.65% of a copolyester of 90 mol percentisophthalic acid, 10 mol percent of the sodium salt of5-sulfoisophthalic acid and 100 mol percent ethylene glycol+0.2%glycidoxypropyltrimethoxy-silane (Dow Coming Z-6040®)+1.2% colloidalsilica (Nalco® 1060 colloidal SiO2)+water

Slip Control Coating C

Slip control coating made up of 2.6% of a copolyester of 90 mol percentisophthalic acid, 10 mol percent of the sodium salt of5-sulfoisophthalic acid and 100 mol percent ethylene glycol+1.4%glycidoxypropyltrimethoxy-silane (Dow Coming Z-6040®)+1.2% colloidalsilica (Nalco® 1060 colloidal SiO2)+water

Back Side Surface Sample Coating Energy B/B COF C1 None 38.58 0.24 IC1 B39.07 0.39 IC2 C 45.08 0.39  1 1% PVP + 0.1% Z6040 + 44.99 0.39 0.1%glycerol + 1.2% 1060  2 10% PVP + 0.1% Z6040 + 61.33 0.38 1% glycerol +1.2% 1060  3 1% PVP + 1.4% Z6040 + 44.82 0.54 0.1% glycerol + 1.2% 1060 4 10% PVP +1.4% Z6040 + 52.99 0.3 1% glycerol + 1.2% 1060  5 1% PVP +0.1% Z6040 + 43.5 0.41 0.1% ethylene glycol + 1.2% 1060  6 10% PVP +0.1% Z6040 + 55.48 0.37 1% ethylene glycol + 1.2% 1060  7 1% PVP + 1.4%Z6040 + 46.77 0.55 0.1% ethylene glycol + 1.2% 1060  8 10% PVP + 1.4%Z6040 + 61.05 0.29 1% ethylene glycol + 1.2% 1060  9 10% PVP + 1.4%Z6040 + 58.17 0.31 1% ethylene glycol + 1.2% 1060 10 1% PVP + 0.1%Z6040 + 1.2% 1060 45.16 0.39 11 1% PVP + 1.4% Z6040 + 1.2% 1060 48.370.53

Example C is a comparative example demonstrating the low back to backCOF of a silicone-coated film having no back side coating.

Examples IC1 and IC2 are alternate embodiments of the present invention,employing the two noted copolyester binders.

The remaining examples in this series employ a PVP binder. Excellentresults are also achieved for these formulations. Most preferred are thesamples containing 10% PVP K-15 (e.g., Examples 2, 4, 6, 8, 9) for thehigher surface energy associated with them. This surface energy level isbeneficial for any additional processing of the surface such as theapplication of a top coat or printing.

The present invention having been thus described with particularreference to the preferred forms and embodiments thereof, it will beobvious that various changes and modifications may be made thereinwithout departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as definedin the appended claims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A coated polymer film comprising: aself-supporting polymer film layer having a front surface and a backsurface; a silicone-containing coating on said front surface that iscapable of releasing free silicone oil; a slip control coating on saidback surface, wherein said slip control coating has an exposed surfaceadapted to contact said free silicone oil, said slip control coatingincluding: a binder including polyvinyl pyrrolidone.
 2. The polymer filmof claim 1, wherein said slip control coating further comprises acoupler including a silane.
 3. The polymer film of claim 2, wherein saidcoupler comprises a glycidoxy silane.
 4. The polymer film of claim 3,wherein said glycidoxy silane comprises glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane.5. The polymer film of claim 2, wherein said coupler is present at about0.1 to about 10 weight percent of said slip control coating.
 6. Thepolymer film of claim 2, wherein said coupler is present at about 0.5 toabout 5 weight percent of said slip control coating.
 7. The polymer filmof claim 2, wherein said binder and said coupler are present at a weightpercent ratio of about 1:3 to about 3:1.
 8. The polymer film of claim 2,wherein said binder and said coupler are present at a weight percentratio of about 2:1.
 9. The polymer film of claim 1, further comprising aprimer layer between said polymer film layer and saidsilicone-containing coating.
 10. The polymer film of claim 1, whereinsaid polymer film layer is oriented in at least one axial direction. 11.The polymer film of claim 1, wherein said polymer film has a backside tobackside coefficient of friction that is substantially equivalent tothat of uncoated polymer film.
 12. The polymer film of claim 1, having aback-to-back coefficient of friction greater than about 0.35.
 13. Thepolymer film of claim 1, wherein said polymer is polyester.
 14. Thepolymer film of claim 1, wherein said binder is present at about 0.1 toabout 25 weight percent of said slip control coating.
 15. The polymerfilm of claim 1, wherein said polyvinyl pyrrolidone is present at about1 to about 10 weight percent of said slip control coating.
 16. Thepolymer film of claim 1, wherein said slip control coating furthercomprises a surfactant.
 17. The polymer film of claim 16, wherein saidsurfactant comprises an anionic surfactant.
 18. The polymer film ofclaim 17, wherein said surfactant comprises sodium lauryl sulfate. 19.The polymer film of claim 17, wherein said surfactant comprises afluorosurfactant.
 20. The polymer film of claim 17, wherein saidsurfactant comprises sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate.
 21. The polymerfilm of claim 17, wherein said surfactant comprises an ethoxylated2,4,7,9-tetramethyl-5-decyl-4,7-diol.
 22. The polymer film of claim 16,wherein said surfactant is present at about 0.0001 to about 5 weightpercent of said slip control coating.
 23. The polymer film of claim 16,wherein said surfactant is present at about 0.001 to about 1 weightpercent of said slip control coating.
 24. The polymer film of claim 1,further comprising a wicking aid.
 25. The polymer film of claim 24,wherein said wicking aid comprises at least one silica.
 26. The polymerfilm of claim 25, wherein said wicking aid comprises colloidal SiO₂. 27.The polymer film of claim 24, wherein said wicking aid is present atabout 0.01 to about 3 weight percent of said slip control coating. 28.The polymer film of claim 24, wherein said wicking aid is present atabout 0.1 to about 1 weight percent of said slip control coating. 29.The polymer film of claim 1, wherein said slip control coating has a pHof about 7 to about
 10. 30. The polymer film of claim 1, wherein saidslip control coating has a pH of about 7.5 to about
 9. 31. The polymerfilm of claim 1, wherein said slip control coating comprises a pHmodifier sufficient to give said slip control coating a basic pH. 32.The polymer film of claim 1, wherein said slip control coating comprisesammonium hydroxide.
 33. The polymer film of claim 1, wherein said slipcontrol coating has a solids level of about 0.5 to about 12 weightpercent.
 34. The polymer film of claim 1, wherein said slip controlcoating has a solids level of about 2 to about 6 weight percent.
 35. Thepolymer film of claim 1, wherein said slip control coating has a coatingthickness of about 2.5×10⁻⁹ m to about 2.5×10⁻⁶ m.
 36. The polymer filmof claim 1, wherein said slip control coating has a coating thickness ofabout 2.5×10⁻⁸ m.